STORYLINE Nestle Water

This storyline has only one article

Viewing thru of

Close timeline

City halts Nestlé work

by Suzanne Hurt, published on October 26, 2009 at 7:48 PM

Storyline: Nestle Water RSS Feed

No high resolution image exists...

Progress bar

Loading images
Slideshow image

 A $14 million retrofit of a proposed Nestlé water-bottling plant has ground to a halt after the city of Sacramento issued a stop-work order while investigating whether the work began before the company had legal authorization from the city.

Late Friday afternoon, the city's Community Development Department issued a stop-work order for Phases II and III shortly before an interim or "urgency" ordinance request was added to the City Council's agenda for Tuesday night. The council is being asked to consider amending the city's zoning code to immediately require special permits for beverage bottling plants. The meeting starts at 6 p.m.

On Monday, City Councilman Kevin McCarty and officials from the city's Community Development Department were trying to determine when Nestlé Waters North America began interior renovation of an industrial warehouse being leased for a new water-bottling operation.

"We're still assessing all the facts," said David Kwong, acting director of the city's Community Development Department. "We're trying to make sure there's nothing being done out of the ordinary."

Legally, construction cannot begin before a start-work authorization or building permit is issued, he said.

A building permit for Phase I was issued Oct. 7, but no start-work authorization has been found, Kwong said, adding that a start-work authorization was issued for Phase II the same day. 

"I don't know if there was an authorization to work for Phase I," he said.

Phase I included foundation work and moving walls, Kwong said. Phase II involves work on water and drainage lines and other operational needs. However, the company's description of the work to be done appears to overlap in the two documents. 

Nestlé maintains the company has not done anything illegal.

"Nestlé Waters is in compliance with the city's building and permitting laws," Brendan O'Rourke, the company's supply chain director and national director of natural resources, said in a written statement. He arrived in Sacramento on Monday to help respond to the unfolding situation.

Phase I construction is complete, the company said. Nestlé began work two months ago and is halfway through renovation of the plant at 8670 Younger Creek Drive, Chris Kemp, Nestlé's Sacramento plant manager, said Wednesday.

"To date, the company has invested more than $3.7 million into this plant in form of permitting fees, construction costs, due diligence payments and costs associated with the movement of equipment from other Nestle Waters plants to Sacramento," read an e-mail from Nestlé on Monday.

The stop-work order may be temporary. A draft ordinance was still being finalized by the city attorney's office late Monday afternoon. The draft goes to council members before being made public, said Amy Williams, spokeswoman for the city manager's office.

The council ought to carefully consider commercial requests to bottle and sell city water, said City Councilman Kevin McCarty, who requested the item be placed on the agenda and later posted a story about his decision.

"Water is increasingly one of more most precious and valuable resources," McCarty said Monday. "My proposal would mandate a further dialogue on all future water-bottling facilities. I think it's an important discussion to have."

Changing the process now would be "troubling," O'Rourke said.

"We have followed the city and state laws throughout this process, invested more than $3.8 million into this facility and hired people to work, all based on the the current law and it would appear that this is an attempt to change those laws midstream," he said. "We find that prospect troubling not only for this plant, but for any business looking for certainty in the siting process."

Nestlé also questioned the legality of the stop-work order. The company said the stop-work order may not be legal because the city already had issued a start-work authorization for Phase II.

"The city has not provided any evidence to support this stop-work order despite the rules that require they do so within 24 hours," said O'Rourke.

The city gave Nestlé preliminary authority to start work on Phase II, but that doesn't give the company the right to continue the work. In addition, no building permit was issued for Phases II and III, said Sheryl Patterson, senior deputy city attorney.

"We do have the right to issue a stop-work order when no building permit has been issued," she said.

An interim ordinance, which would not require review under the California Environmental Quality Act, would give the city time to consider a formal amendment to the zoning code. An interim ordinance requires a super majority or two-thirds vote of the council, to pass, Patterson said.

Nestlé has paid the city $65,000 in permitting and application fees. The company also agreed to hire local contractors and has committed to paying them $600,000 for their work.

Nestlé applied for a building permit through the city's Facility Permit Program in order to make tenant improvements, including underslab plumbing, demolition of existing partition walls and construction of new ones.

Questions also are being raised over whether it was correct to use the Facility Permit Program in this instance. "The Facility Permit Program facilitates a rapid approval process for tenant alterations and improvements of commercial and industrial facilities: minor tenant improvements, including maintenance, repair and minor alterations; and major interior tenant improvements and remodels. This includes tenant improvements to new and existing structures," according to the city's Web site.

"I'm not sure if it all adds up," McCarty said.


Suzanne Hurt is a staff reporter for The Sacramento Press.

Liked this article? Share it with your friends:

Conversation Express your views, debate, and be heard with those in your area closest to the issue.RSS Feed

October 26, 2009 | 8:41 PM
This city does not want the taxes generated by this plant anyway; and people in Sacramento don't need more jobs even though unemployment’s hovering near 13%.

This is a city over run by NIMBY’s.
2 9
REPLY
October 26, 2009 | 10:32 PM
This is a city overrun by the sort of illegal and incomplete permitting and oversight alleged in the article.

So, you think civic fraud and illegal behavior is justified by "jobs"?

6 2
REPLY
October 26, 2009 | 11:38 PM
Gee Marion...just the other day didn't you say there was no evidence of corruption in Sacramento...
3 5
REPLY
October 27, 2009 | 12:09 AM
Jim Knapp, No. I didn't. Please don't include me in any more of your ravings.
4 3
REPLY
October 27, 2009 | 9:39 AM
I have been studying Nestle's practices since 2003 when they first showed "overt" interest in McCloud. It is my opinion that corruption follows them wherever they go. Anyone can be bought off. I have evidence of the huge conflict of interest between Siskiyou County and Nestle.

The first comment posted sounds like it is from Nestle's PR firm. They do that in blogs all over the country!

Wherever Nestle goes there is "fishy" stuff. They feel they are entitled to do whatever they please and will falsify information to achieve their goals! I can back up with facts what I am saying. Go to STOP NESTLE WATERS DOT ORG.
3 0
REPLY
October 27, 2009 | 4:03 PM
Marion writes, "So, you think civic fraud and illegal behavior is justified by "jobs"?" You hit the hammer on the nail-- it appears some people do think civic fraud and illegal behavior is justified by jobs or promises of jobs... That's the same misrepresentation of facts that caused so many to vote for Mayor Johnson-- Promises, Promises by any means necessary ignoring deceit, illegal activity and then we're expected to trust in that person. All that glitters is not gold and there is much fools gold in Sacramento and Nestle is appearing to be yet another leprechaun in search for a pot of gold.
0 0
REPLY
October 26, 2009 | 9:16 PM
It's only 60 jobs in exchange for our water supply. hmmm. let's go green! Let's say no to the bottled water industry!
9 1
REPLY
October 27, 2009 | 12:28 PM
BRAVO!
1 0
REPLY
October 26, 2009 | 9:45 PM
Maybe with Mr. Thomas gone we will see actual leadership. Thank You! Mr. Kwong, I do hope this Council has your back.
6 1
REPLY
October 27, 2009 | 8:19 AM
i spend alot of time in the building department (save midtown ) & your statement is misinformed
good morning
0 1
REPLY
October 26, 2009 | 11:26 PM
In Suzanne Hurt's previous piece on this issue:

http://www.sacramentopress.com/headline/16287/Discussion_grows_over_Nestl_plant

"Neither Nestlé nor the city's Economic Development Department would disclose the rate paid to lease the building from Buzz Oates Real Estate Co." "The warehouse was nothing more than four walls, a ceiling and a floor when Nestlé's lease began two months ago..."

Aka a "Buzz Box." Two months later:

"Crews are halfway through building warehouse docks, reinforcing concrete flooring to support heavy equipment, and building a front office, lab, and areas for manufacturing, chemical storage and shipping, said Chris Kemp, a project manager who has overseen manufacturing and quality assurance at Nestlé facilities since 2002."

"Nestlé applied for a building permit through the city's Facility Permit Program in order to make tenant improvements, including underslab plumbing, demolition of existing partition walls and construction of new ones.

"Questions also are being raised over whether it was correct to use the Facility Permit Program in this instance.

"I'm not sure if it all adds up," McCarty said.

Something smells fishy.

"Nestlé also questioned the legality of the stop-work order. The company said the stop-work order may not be legal because the city already had issued a start-work authorization for Phase II.

"The city has not provided any evidence to support this stop-work order despite the rules that require they do so within 24 hours," said O'Rourke.

Has Nestle provided any evidence of the required Start-Work Authorization for Phase I? If it's a paperwork SNAFU, that's easy enough to sort out. If it's another squirrelly Sacramento-style permit violation, then:

"The city gave Nestlé preliminary authority to start work on Phase II, but that doesn't give the company the right to continue the work. In addition, no building permit was issued for Phases II and III, said Sheryl Patterson, senior deputy city attorney.

"We do have the right to issue a stop-work order when no building permit has been issued," she said.

Looks like the City has the right to tell Nestle to Shut The Phase Up.

And is this tangled web a way for a multinational corporation to evade local review and the public process, invited by a new mayor to sneak in the backdoor, bust open a Buzz Box and sell us back the water they stole?

Great job, Suzanne Hurt and SacPress. Thanks for being on top of this and being so thorough.
11 2
REPLY
October 27, 2009 | 3:54 PM
Gosh Thank You Marion -YOUR PASSION, DETERMINATION AND INSIGHT is teaching me so very much- I LOVE to read your comments. I wish I could meet you. I absolutely agree with your post and where their is smoke, their is fire. I read on another article where Mayor Johnson disgrees with the stop work order and well that's no surprise seems he has no problem with people not following the rules or under-handed tactics... what's good for the goose (Mayor Johnson) he seems to feel it's also good for the gander -corporations (Nestle) to go behind the backs of public process...
in the spirit of halloween I'd say our mayor has no problem with --TRICKS FOR TREATS
Marion- I so enjoy reading your comments
2 0
REPLY
October 27, 2009 | 6:11 PM
Back 'atcha Rhonda. You are too kind.
0 0
REPLY
October 27, 2009 | 7:46 AM
awesome article, awesome news, take that Nestle and your non-existent job offers.
I love how they try and lure us with the promise of jobs and then turn around and give the jobs to non-Sacramentans. Jerks.
4 2
REPLY
October 27, 2009 | 3:45 PM
Thank you waldorfandstatler for your comment "I love how they try and lure us with the promise of jobs and then turn around and give the jobs to non Sacramentans." I agree it is an awesome article, awesone news and your comment is awesome as well.
1 0
REPLY
October 27, 2009 | 11:30 AM
Good job, Suzanne!
2 0
REPLY
October 27, 2009 | 6:07 PM
Excellent coverage. Another :thumbsup:
1 0
REPLY
October 27, 2009 | 12:05 PM
Yay! It makes me so happy to see the people stand up and tell their government what to do with the corporations who take advantage of old laws. Nestle knows exactly what they are doing. They see an old zoning code and a city who hasn't addressed this too important issue...so they swoop in like sharks. Bite back little pirhanas! we'll win this fight together! This is the kind of world I want to live in. People engaged!!
4 1
REPLY
October 27, 2009 | 3:43 PM
'Bite back little pirhanas! we'll win this fight together! This is the kind of world I want to live in. People engaged!!'-- I couldn't agree more and it makes me so happy as well. This is why I like Sacramento Press- the people are engaged!! It's not fostering hate (as mentioned in a previous article I read) Sacramento Press is giving the voice to the people and in turn those elected into office are reading, responding and held accountable.... Thank you geofreak
1 0
REPLY
October 28, 2009 | 7:48 AM
I'm not sure the city has a legal right to stop construction of the plant. What I've heard is that they don't need any special permitting since the property is already zoned as industrial. We could do what they did in an Australian town though and ban the sale of bottled water. The residents there were furious over the prospect of an outsider taking their water, trucking it up to Sydney for processing and then selling it back to them.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31822716/ns/world_news-world_environment/
0 0
REPLY
Leave a Comment
User icon
Type your comment in the box below Edit your comment in the box below

Type tags into the box below.
Use commas to separate your tags.

Cancel Submit

Please Log in or Sign up

Existing Members

Sign In Progress bar Forgot Password?

New Users Create an Account Here
Progress bar
Verification email has been sent. To validate your account open the link provided in the message.
There was a problem sending your verification email. Please contact support@sacramentopress.com
Progress bar Login background Tag cloud top Tag cloud background Tag cloud bottom Login manager background